Best third-party lenses

[wickidwombat]

just sent the lens in I didnt want it matched to a boday as I have 4 bodies and my parents havea 600D my brother has a 550D and those bodies dont have micro adjust so i wanted it set as neutral as possible, i was happy to need to compensate my bodies with a micro adjust a little I just was worried about having to push it as far out as 13.

[D.Sim]

that makes sense...

Cheers mate. helps a bit in the decision making

[Enthusiast]

Just some more experience with the sigmas

I do have several Sigma primes from fisheye to 105 macro.
The elder types have a bit of a crappy usablity because you have to switch to pieces for autofocus/manual changing but the HSM pieces are all very good. The 85mm 1.4 is the best lens I had ever on a camera, even better than the Canon 85mm 1.2 L. The L hase a very nice and a bit dreamy IQ but you have 30-50% scrap in your pictures because people moving out of focus before the focus finished. The Sigma is much faster, that makes it much easier, even in low light.
The autofocus in spot on at all apertures (not like the 50 1,4 witch is fine at 1.4 and >2.0). I bought one of the first lenses came to Germany, it could not be an improvement later in the production.

[Jemlnlx]

Im sure they've been mentioned but Im a big fan of the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro and the 17-50mm f/2.8 for Crop Sensors. Ive have owned both in the past and loved them both. The 90mm is super sharp and the 17-50 really sharp as well. It has a crop equivalent of about 24-75 and is about half the price of Canon's 24-70mm.

[John Thomas]

Tokina AT-X PRO FX 16-28mm F/2.8

A very good UWA for FF sensors. Very sharp. Top notch image quality, much better than Canon 17-40 F/4 L. Tokina is better at F/2.8 compared with Canon at F/4. The price is very affordable - cheaper than Canon 17-40 and approx. one 3rd from Canon 16-36 F/2.8 L. The focus is very very quick and accurate. The build quality is impressive.

Drawbacks are:
- heavy
- (normally) doesn't take filters, but one can put Lee's filters on it.

Generally, I'm very pleased with this lens.

[pwp]

The OP was asking about primes in particular. I have waded through a raft of 50mm glass over the years and have settled pretty comfortably with a Sigma 50 f/1.4. As I shoot people and like to include action, AF is very important to me. However if I was inclined towards more static subjects, and had ultra IQ as a very high priority, then a Zeiss manual focus lens would be appealing.

For general shooting, Sigma seems to have a very strong range of viable alternative glass to the Canon/Nikon offerings.

Paul Wright

[wickidwombat]

The OP was asking about primes in particular. I have waded through a raft of 50mm glass over the years and have settled pretty comfortably with a Sigma 50 f/1.4. As I shoot people and like to include action, AF is very important to me. However if I was inclined towards more static subjects, and had ultra IQ as a very high priority, then a Zeiss manual focus lens would be appealing.

For general shooting, Sigma seems to have a very strong range of viable alternative glass to the Canon/Nikon offerings.

Paul Wright

What is your opinion of the sigma 1.4 vs the canon 1.4 especially at f1.4 to f2
I've been wondering if the 50 siggy is as good as the 85, the 50 is an older design though isnt it?
I wonder if sigma will update the 50 to the same level as the 85, if they did that i'd find it hard to resist getting one.
I find the canon not so good wide open but once its down to f2 its improving and its very sharp by f2.8
I'm really hoping for an update

[Enthusiast]

My expirience with the Sigma 50mm 1.4:
It´s very good at 1.4 and 2.0 in comparision to the Canon it´s a bit sharper wide open.
At 1.6 and 1.8 they are not exact in focus both due to focus movement.

Bad: it´s bigger and havier than the Canon

Nice:
- 77mm Filter, same as nearly all my other lenses
- less vingetting
- fast and silent focus

[RichATL]

Loving my Sigma 70-200 2.8 (non-OS)...
Super sharp, silent, and inexpensive.

[skitron]

I've been wondering if the 50 siggy is as good as the 85, the 50 is an older design though isnt it?
I wonder if sigma will update the 50 to the same level as the 85, if they did that i'd find it hard to resist getting one.

Rumor has it the "new finish" had optical updates as well. I have a "new finish" 50 and it doesn't have anywhere near the focus shift displayed in reviews of early ones. Mine has pretty much the same shift as displayed on photozone.de for the Sigma 85. All to say worth a try if buying where you can return if needed.

[ruuneos]

Till 30.4 local store got deal offer for Canon 50mm F1.4 30% sale so which one to get Sigma 50mm or Canon 50mm f1.4?
Canon is smaller and bit less weight than Sigma and it's pretty sharp on f5.6 and Sigma is sharpest in f?
Sigma got big plus for inc. lens hood

Which one to get?

[liberace]

Till 30.4 local store got deal offer for Canon 50mm F1.4 30% sale so which one to get Sigma 50mm or Canon 50mm f1.4?
Canon is smaller and bit less weight than Sigma and it's pretty sharp on f5.6 and Sigma is sharpest in f?
Sigma got big plus for inc. lens hood

Which one to get?

You should really go off more than the opinion of a few guys off a forum, but I really prefer the Sigma. I normally use it at f/2.0 on a 7D.

I have LOTS of L glass. The only non-Canon lenses I own are the Tokina 11-16mm and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4

[Arkarch]

I got the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 recently -  amazing, sharp, beautiful color, "3D".
With my 5D mark III - Wow!

I want to go out and shoot just so I can play with that lens.

Keep in mind Zeiss is for Full Frame.  Its way too much price for Crop if you are not using that awesome sharp edge.  Though I may use my 21mm sometime as a "35" on my 7D when needed.

Yes it is manual focus but the camera's Focus Assist beep/flash confirms you are are on target.  I actually love that - I can set my focus on what I want in the frame, then frame it up without AF messing it up.   Yes, you can switch the AF point or switch to MF, but its just so pure with the Zeiss.

My lens strategy - Canon "L" on the long (got the 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II for starters - want the 100 Macro and 400 DO).  And Zeiss on the wide end (the 15 and 35 are next).  And a mix in the middle (the new 24-70 II should be phenomenal, and the 85 is going to be a debate of sharp/microcontrast vs aperture/AF).

Keep in mind you can buy Zeiss in ZF or ZF.2 as a Nikon native F and convert to Canon EF-mount if you are thinking playing both sides of the line.  As much as the D800 is interesting to me, I have confidence Canon will match or surpass the resolution in a year so I am sticking with Zeiss ZE and keeping it simple.

[digitalninja]

I love my sigma 50mm 1.4. The AF is great. I'm thinking about going for the sigma 85 soon.

[FlowerPhotog]

I have two Sigma's,  the 70mm 2.8 macro and the 150mm 2.8 macro (non-IS version).  Both of these lenses are very sharp, with the 70mm probably being the sharpest lens I own - it is incredibly sharp edge to edge on a full frame sensor.   The AF is good on both, but a little slow and noisy on the 70.   

The 150 macro has become my favorite flower lens since getting the 5D Mark III - the DOF on the full frame creates a very creamy bokeh that is so much better than on the crop sensor.   The ability to use a higher ISO without noise on the Mark III vs my t2i has also let me use the 150 handheld in many more situations by increasing the shutter speed.   Had to use a tripod with that lens most of the time on the t2i. 

Did a Lens-Align check on all my lenses when I got the 5D Mark III, and both the Sigma's didn't require any adjustment. However, one odd thing with both lenses is using Live View on my t2i works they both work fine, but on my new 5D Mark III they both seem to struggle locking on focus - even in good light.  Same shot with normal viewfinder AF they're are right on the money pretty quickly.

Just ordered the Zeiss 50mm 2.0 Makro-Planar ZE lens, so we'll see if that can overtake the Sigma 70 as my sharpest lens.